Effects of the Concomitant Administration of Tamsulosin (0.8 mg/Day) on the Pharmacokinetic and Safety Profile of Theophylline (5 mg/kg): A Placebo-Controlled Evaluation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We performed a single-blind, sequential-design study to investigate the effects of concomitant oral tamsulosin 0.8 mg/day on the pharmacokinetics and safety of intravenous theophylline 5 mg/kg in healthy subjects. Ten healthy volunteers aged 19-39 years received placebo on study days 0, 1, 2 and 10 and tamsulosin on days 3-9. Theophylline was administered intravenously on days 1 and 9. Theophylline and tamsulosin pharmacokinetic data were determined following administration of the drugs on days 1 and 9 and day 9, respectively. No differences were observed in theophylline pharmacokinetic parameters with and without concomitant tamsulosin, and there were no abnormalities in tamsulosin pharmacokinetic data. Some significant changes in vital signs and a number of mild adverse reactions were reported, but the overall safety profile of tamsulosin and theophylline was acceptable. The results of the study suggest that no dose adjustment in tamsulosin is necessary when it is administered concomitantly with theophylline.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it